1

Knowledge exchange in ecosystem assessments

– previous experiences and looking ahead for IPBES

Dialogue Workshop on Knowledge for the 21st Century: Indigenous knowledge, Traditional knowledge, Science and connecting diverse

knowledge systems Usdub, Guna Yala, Panama, 10 – 13 April 2012

Maria Tengö, Stockholm Resilience Centre, Stockholm University

Stockholm Resilience Centre

• Advances transdisciplinary research for governance of social-ecological systems

• A special emphasis on resilience – the ability to deal with change and continue to develop

Overview

• Validation of what for whom?

• Validation and exchange of knowledge systems in the Millennium Ecosystem Assessment

• A suggestion for the IPBES – Dual Evidence Base

• The Program for Ecosystem Change and Society

Validation in science policy processes like IPBES

Science needs validation to be credible for decison making

Validation of what for whom?In what context?

MA identified two main challenges: • Who establishes what appropriate ”validation” of

information is?• Can an assessment that is grounded in formal Western

scientific traditions ever be legitimate, credible, and useful to indigenous and local communities

(Reid 2004)

Millenium Ecosystem Assessment (MA)

• UN driven international scientific assessment of the health of ecosystems 2000-2005

• Map and evaluate the capacity of ecosystems to generate services

• Multiple scales: global and sub-global including local studies

• Inclusion of multiple knowledge systems

Validation of multiple knowledge systems in the MA

Mechanisms for allowing use of diverse knowledge subglobal

Scientific mechanisms of validation: triangulation of information, review by other communities and stakeholders etc.

Methodology not given

The MA experience

25 of 34 sub-global included multiple knowledge systems

Limited influence across scales

Emphasize on ecology partial understanding of potential of diverse knowledge systems

Time and resources!!

Examples from local assessment

South African MA(SAfMA)

• Participatory methods for gathering and validating information

• Two-way translation and cross-validation of knowledge

• Local knowledge did not inform higher levels

Kristianstad Vattenrike, Sweden

• Studying and interacting with an ongoing process of practitioners building on local knowledge in ecosystem management

• Validated results using peer-review processes of scientific journals

Suggestion from International Science Workshop on Assessments

for IPBES

United Nations University, Tokyo, Japan 25- 29 July

2011

Dual Based Evidence

(slides courtesy of E. Brondizio, T Elmqvist, M Spierenburg)

Dual Based Evidence

• Definition - different knowledge systems are viewed as generating equally valid evidence for interpreting change, trajectories and causal relationships.

• Peer-review process takes into account that different criteria of validation should be applied to data and information originating from different knowledge systems.

Validation

• Some data/information from local and indigenous knowledge systems can be validated by scientific methods others are highly context-specific and difficult to generalize

• Important not to impose standard scientific criteria, such as replication and generalization - validation is instead done through transparent and accepted methods, consistent and sensitive to the local and cultural context.

Areas of interface

• There are various subject areas in which links between local and indigenous and scientific information is possible, which allow for complementary knowledge input into IPBES. A few examples are: – Agro-biodiversity– Ethno ecology of landscapes– Ethno-taxonomy– Linkages between species– Local institutions, rules and regulations of access,– Environmental management knowledge and

technology

Challenges remain.....

• Who establishes what appropriate validation of information is?

• Can an assessment that caters to the need of mupltiple kinds of users be truly legitimate to any user?

Your input: - Is this a valid/relevant approach? - Suggestions for procedures for

validation? - Is ”formal” validation needed?

Concluding words

• Transdisciplinarity is part of the way forward– Thinking broadly about validation

• Plenty of examples of validation of local and indigenous knowledge that are perceived as legitimate in the scientific literature – matter of how it is done!

• Is it desirable?

Program on Ecosystem Change and Society (PECS)

• Recently launched 10-year research program• Sponsored by ICSU and UNESCO. • International Program Office hosted by the

Stockholm Resilience Centre (SRC).

• Explicit focus on interdisciplinarity and acknowledging people’s connection to the biosphere.

• Place-based: how stewardship of ecosystem services is shaped by the dynamic interplay between the global and the local, past, present and future.

18

www.stockholmresilience.su.se

Thank you!

Maria TengöStockholm Resilience Centre

Stockholm Universitymaria.tengo@stockholmresilience.su.se

What kind of knowledge is needed for ecosystem assessments?

• What is an ecosystem?• What kind of knowledge is needed?

• MA expanded focus from ecosystems at drivers and responsesand further identified the need to include governance and social-ecological systems

• The first knowledge system clash – between natural sciences and social sciences and the humanities.

• Platon: knowledge as "justified true belief." • "The question how knowledge should be defined

is perhaps the most important and difficult…... This may seem surprising: at first sight it might be thought that knowledge might be defined as belief which is in agreement with the facts. The trouble is that no one knows what a belief is, no one knows what a fact is, and no one knows what sort of agreement between them would make a belief true."

• Natural science vs social science, vs interdisciplinarity

• Validation through use

– PECS as an opportunity

• Recent paper – is it disrespectful?– Depends on how it is made!!!